How judicial integrity collapses

Home > Opinion > Meanwhile

print dictionary print

How judicial integrity collapses

KIM HYOUNG-GU
The author is the Washington bureau chief of the JoongAng Ilbo.

On the first floor of the Neo-Renaissance white marble U.S. Supreme Court building, visitors can find a large statue at the center. It is the statue of John Marshall, the fourth chief justice of the Supreme Court. While serving as the chief justice from 1801 to 1835, Marshall established the foundation and tradition of the Supreme Court in the early days of the founding of the United States.

Next to the central hall are the busts of chief justices, and large portraits of the Supreme Court justices are hung on the walls. They show the respect and courtesy of Americans for the Supreme Court justices. They are guaranteed a lifetime tenure “during good behavior,” a special authority likened to the pope.

Current Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts (17th) is conservative, but he has gotten bipartisan support for being faithful to legal logic, unrestricted by ideology. While maintaining a moderate conservative stance, Roberts is considered to be leading the highest U.S. judicial institution with balance, writing progressive opinions in major cases such as his ruling that “Obama Care” was constitutional.

However, the Supreme Court has been under public criticism lately. Ethics scandals involving some justices have been exposed. Justice Clarence Thomas has accepted free luxury trips on a private jet from a megadonor, and Justice Samuel Alito accepted a luxury fishing trip to Alaska with billionaires.

The Supreme Court announced its own ethics code on Nov. 13 to restore its honor, but it has already lost the confidence of the public. As the ethics code does not include punishment for its violation and clear enforcement procedure, the New York Times called it “toothless.”

Approval rating for the Supreme Court’s performance, which had remained around 60 percent, fell to 40 percent, the lowest ever. This is a case in the United States illustrating how it is not easy to restore judicial authority once it has fallen.

After the National Assembly rejected a motion to appoint Lee Gyun-ryong as the chief justice of the Supreme Court — and after Constitutional Court President Yoo Nam-seok retired without a successor — it left the head posts of both the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court vacant at the same time. Cho Hee-dae, the new nominee for Supreme Court chief justice, and Lee Jong-seok, the nominee for Constitutional Court president, have not completed the National Assembly’s consent process.

The public’s distrust of the court is nothing new. The independence of the judiciary and the restoration of the rule of law are more urgent than ever. I hope the chief justices of the Supreme Court and Constitutional Court who can restore the fallen authority of the judiciary and regain trust can be appointed as soon as possible.
Log in to Twitter or Facebook account to connect
with the Korea JoongAng Daily
help-image Social comment?
s
lock icon

To write comments, please log in to one of the accounts.

Standards Board Policy (0/250자)